All these posts, attacking DEI, seem to be inferring that there is some vast conspiracy to dumb down our academic institutions and research organizations by forcing "woke" ideologies on educators and grant recipients. Rather than pointing out that there is a large pool of talent that remains largely untapped because of systemic racism and sexism, we are told that efforts designed to address the limited number of minority and women STEM faculty members are akin to Soviet-style indoctrination. Seriously?
How can it be that so many prestigious institutions are all making the same mistakes in developing policies regarding DEI? It seems far more likely that the attacks on DEI are due to a simple resistance to change.
Bottom line - I trust scientists to tell me about the nature of the universe and I trust professional education administrators and policy makers to run our institutions. I do not trust administrators to perform scientific research and I do not trust scientists to run a university. Oh... and anyone comparing DEI initiatives to Soviet brainwashing is out of touch with reality.
your mistake is you trust administrators to run universities... We wouldn't be writing these things if they knew what they were doing.. they are requiring group think.. you simply have no idea.. because you have no contact.. anyway, believe what you like.. if you are not in academia, and don't have kids in school, no worries.. except for the next generation
Education departments are the worst offenders. Even before the Woke take-over, they were promulgated crazy "innovations" that are responsible for the sad state of math and science education in the USA.
How do you define "the Woke take-over"? How are you using (or abusing) the term woke? To what crazy "innovations" do you refer? Can you provide a few examples?
I'm not certain what I should conclude from your terse reply, but I'll take a whack at it anyway...
1. You clearly trust right-wing viewpoints. The Stanford Review, run by Peter Thiel, Josh Hawley, and other "stellar" conservatives, an opinion rag that brought us "masterpieces" such as this gem
is not a credible source of information, as far as I'm concerned. It is at best, right-wing opinion and punditry and at worse right-wing and sometimes racist propaganda.
2. You don't like to reply to simple questions with simple answers. I asked about YOUR definitions of "woke" and a "woke take-over" and wanted to see an few examples of the "crazy innovations". A reply with two links to a right-wing opinion rag that has a long history of publishing questionable content is not an answer.
Your third link was a bit more interesting. Although they incorrectly blame CRT, DEI, etc with failures in the public school system, they at least make some reasonable sounding proposals for change that can be analyzed and debated. Public schools have been struggling to provide quality education for far longer than those ideas (CRT, ...) have been around. I'm pretty sure that's why we have a new "new math" every few decades going back to the 60s at least. Oh... and every time a "new math" was proposed or adopted, there was an outcry against it... again resistance to change is a very old theme.
It's a mistake to trust trained professionals to competently perform their jobs? Who should we trust to run universities if not professional administrators?
How do you justify the claim thhat admins don't know what they are doing? Are universities going out of business? Are students and faculty fleeing US schools en masse to pursue education and teaching positions in less objectionable environs? If not, how are universities and university administrators failing?
Are educational institutions really requiring "group think" or are they requiring that certain facts, related to governement and society sanctioned racism and sexism, are acknowledged by the people they hire?
I don't need to be in academia to see the signs of simple human resistance to societal change when I see them nor do I need to be in academia to recognize the absurdity of claims like those in the articles you've recently posted claiming that university DEI programs are like soviet disinformation and political indoctrination campaigns. For every horror story you post decrying the evils of DEI, I suspect I could find an article in support of DEI.
My position is not about belief. It's about data and likelihoods. From what I can find, DEI statement requirements are not the norm. A study of nearly 1000 universities, conducted in 2020 showed that about 1-in-5 schools require DEI statements of faculty candidates. I know you cited a personal survey that suggested 24 of 25 jobs postings but you didn't mention how those job postings were distributed among schools and regions (if they were all UC schools, I'm surprised it wasn't 25 of 25). Furthermore, It seems that university faculty are evenly split in their opinions of the value and importance of DEI programs. Do those faculty members who support DEI initiatives also have "no idea"? If your position is correct, then about 50% of university faculty members and all the admins supporting DEI must have "no idea" (despite their being in academia). This seems unlikely. The fact about half of faculty members object to DEI initiatives is fully compatible with the resistance to change hypothesis.
I have a kid who is looking into grad programs and I'll likely have grand kids one day who may attend various universities. So, yeah. I have a stake in this. I also worry about the potential loss of technological advances if we continue to ignore the gender and racial imbalances in university faculty. Unless you believe that white males are somehow more capable then other groups, then the proportion of minorities and women in the general population should mirror the proportion of those groups in academia. It does not. That implies that there is a large pool of untapped talent. DEI initiatives are an attempt to tap that source. Maybe there are better solutions than DEI. I haven't seen anything proposed.
When you read the right-leaning media all you hear is the authoritarianism of the left and assaults on free speech because of DEI and "wokeness". When you read the left-leaning media all you hear is authoritarianism from the right and assault on free speech (book bans), assault on individual rights (abortion bans and restrictions, restriction of gay and LGBT rights, US Supreme Court poised to curtail other freedoms, such as gay marriage, possibly restrictions on contraception; states banning courses; canceling left wing professors, etc). Take your pick!
All these posts, attacking DEI, seem to be inferring that there is some vast conspiracy to dumb down our academic institutions and research organizations by forcing "woke" ideologies on educators and grant recipients. Rather than pointing out that there is a large pool of talent that remains largely untapped because of systemic racism and sexism, we are told that efforts designed to address the limited number of minority and women STEM faculty members are akin to Soviet-style indoctrination. Seriously?
How can it be that so many prestigious institutions are all making the same mistakes in developing policies regarding DEI? It seems far more likely that the attacks on DEI are due to a simple resistance to change.
Bottom line - I trust scientists to tell me about the nature of the universe and I trust professional education administrators and policy makers to run our institutions. I do not trust administrators to perform scientific research and I do not trust scientists to run a university. Oh... and anyone comparing DEI initiatives to Soviet brainwashing is out of touch with reality.
your mistake is you trust administrators to run universities... We wouldn't be writing these things if they knew what they were doing.. they are requiring group think.. you simply have no idea.. because you have no contact.. anyway, believe what you like.. if you are not in academia, and don't have kids in school, no worries.. except for the next generation
Education departments are the worst offenders. Even before the Woke take-over, they were promulgated crazy "innovations" that are responsible for the sad state of math and science education in the USA.
How do you define "the Woke take-over"? How are you using (or abusing) the term woke? To what crazy "innovations" do you refer? Can you provide a few examples?
https://stanfordreview.org/review-investigation-jo-boaler-is-worse-than-we-thought/
https://stanfordreview.org/boaler-professor/
https://www.persuasion.community/p/why-america-is-flunking-math-education
I'm not certain what I should conclude from your terse reply, but I'll take a whack at it anyway...
1. You clearly trust right-wing viewpoints. The Stanford Review, run by Peter Thiel, Josh Hawley, and other "stellar" conservatives, an opinion rag that brought us "masterpieces" such as this gem
https://stanfordreview.org/dont-get-out-the-vote/
is not a credible source of information, as far as I'm concerned. It is at best, right-wing opinion and punditry and at worse right-wing and sometimes racist propaganda.
2. You don't like to reply to simple questions with simple answers. I asked about YOUR definitions of "woke" and a "woke take-over" and wanted to see an few examples of the "crazy innovations". A reply with two links to a right-wing opinion rag that has a long history of publishing questionable content is not an answer.
Your third link was a bit more interesting. Although they incorrectly blame CRT, DEI, etc with failures in the public school system, they at least make some reasonable sounding proposals for change that can be analyzed and debated. Public schools have been struggling to provide quality education for far longer than those ideas (CRT, ...) have been around. I'm pretty sure that's why we have a new "new math" every few decades going back to the 60s at least. Oh... and every time a "new math" was proposed or adopted, there was an outcry against it... again resistance to change is a very old theme.
It's a mistake to trust trained professionals to competently perform their jobs? Who should we trust to run universities if not professional administrators?
How do you justify the claim thhat admins don't know what they are doing? Are universities going out of business? Are students and faculty fleeing US schools en masse to pursue education and teaching positions in less objectionable environs? If not, how are universities and university administrators failing?
Are educational institutions really requiring "group think" or are they requiring that certain facts, related to governement and society sanctioned racism and sexism, are acknowledged by the people they hire?
I don't need to be in academia to see the signs of simple human resistance to societal change when I see them nor do I need to be in academia to recognize the absurdity of claims like those in the articles you've recently posted claiming that university DEI programs are like soviet disinformation and political indoctrination campaigns. For every horror story you post decrying the evils of DEI, I suspect I could find an article in support of DEI.
My position is not about belief. It's about data and likelihoods. From what I can find, DEI statement requirements are not the norm. A study of nearly 1000 universities, conducted in 2020 showed that about 1-in-5 schools require DEI statements of faculty candidates. I know you cited a personal survey that suggested 24 of 25 jobs postings but you didn't mention how those job postings were distributed among schools and regions (if they were all UC schools, I'm surprised it wasn't 25 of 25). Furthermore, It seems that university faculty are evenly split in their opinions of the value and importance of DEI programs. Do those faculty members who support DEI initiatives also have "no idea"? If your position is correct, then about 50% of university faculty members and all the admins supporting DEI must have "no idea" (despite their being in academia). This seems unlikely. The fact about half of faculty members object to DEI initiatives is fully compatible with the resistance to change hypothesis.
I have a kid who is looking into grad programs and I'll likely have grand kids one day who may attend various universities. So, yeah. I have a stake in this. I also worry about the potential loss of technological advances if we continue to ignore the gender and racial imbalances in university faculty. Unless you believe that white males are somehow more capable then other groups, then the proportion of minorities and women in the general population should mirror the proportion of those groups in academia. It does not. That implies that there is a large pool of untapped talent. DEI initiatives are an attempt to tap that source. Maybe there are better solutions than DEI. I haven't seen anything proposed.
When you read the right-leaning media all you hear is the authoritarianism of the left and assaults on free speech because of DEI and "wokeness". When you read the left-leaning media all you hear is authoritarianism from the right and assault on free speech (book bans), assault on individual rights (abortion bans and restrictions, restriction of gay and LGBT rights, US Supreme Court poised to curtail other freedoms, such as gay marriage, possibly restrictions on contraception; states banning courses; canceling left wing professors, etc). Take your pick!
Here is a perspective from far left: https://www.thefp.com/p/how-elites-ate-the-social-justice?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=260347&post_id=137518693&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=false&r=ggupy&utm_medium=email
DeBoer, who self-describes as a Marxist, points out the many harms of the Woke ideology.
I can also recommend the recent book by Yascha Mounk, the Identity Trap.
I have seen lots of articles like that. I want to see discussion of the harms of the right wing ideology!